You so called liberals are to blame. Call it a threshold shift. After so many years of wiping your stinking @$$3$ with the Constitution, we get caught sometimes in a moment of weakness. The difference is, our instincts are to side with the good guys while you liberal idiots always side with the bad guys. Still want to play "Who Tramples The Constitution?":rolleyes:

Tell you what, laminate the 2nd Amendment and call it a day.

02-15-2012, 03:21 PM

AmPat

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble

Tell you what, laminate the 2nd Amendment and call it a day.

I'll see your two and raise you ,,, Oh heck with it, I'm all in. What about you?
Let's just laminate the entire Constitution.

02-15-2012, 04:19 PM

DumbAss Tanker

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble

No, I don't.

I have to tell you, for a group of so-called conservatives, you guys sure find it easy to toss out a few amendments at the drop of a hat.

The First Amendment is not an unbounded playground for criminals and active enemies to hide in, much as you might prefer it to be so. The Paultards would probably find your position refreshingly enlightened, though.

02-15-2012, 05:02 PM

Odysseus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble

We can do that anyway. But that aside, there is the claim that it was gathered through public records. Also, as to the first, are you sure Anonymous fits this profile:

Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation,

Catch him (if you want to, anyway) and you could probably make a case but who exactly are they working for?

It doesn't matter who they are working for, as the law applies. Note the emphasis:

Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation,

In other words, Anonymous doesn't have to be working for a foreign power, just the fact that they seek to injure the United States is sufficient under the law. And, I'm not saying that we catch them, I'm saying that we find them. If we can capture them, I'll happily waterboard these idiots until they spout gills and flippers, but we may not be able to capture them, and we don't have to, as they are engaging in espionage in wartime, which makes them combatants, and we are within our rights to engage combatants.
Let them try to hack a Predator drone as it puts a Hellfire missile through their bedroom window.

02-15-2012, 05:11 PM

Arroyo_Doble

Quote:

Originally Posted by Odysseus

It doesn't matter who they are working for, as the law applies. Note the emphasis:

Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation,

In other words, Anonymous doesn't have to be working for a foreign power, just the fact that they seek to injure the United States is sufficient under the law. And, I'm not saying that we catch them, I'm saying that we find them. If we can capture them, I'll happily waterboard these idiots until they spout gills and flippers, but we may not be able to capture them, and we don't have to, as they are engaging in espionage in wartime, which makes them combatants, and we are within our rights to engage combatants. Let them try to hack a Predator drone as it puts a Hellfire missile through their bedroom window.

Not if that window is in the United States.

You cross a serious line when you enable the military to start assassinating American citizens in their homes (assuming that home is here .... in Pakistan, have at it. With or without that nation's permission).

02-15-2012, 05:56 PM

Apache

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble

Not if that window is in the United States.

You cross a serious line when you enable the military to start assassinating American citizens in their homes (assuming that home is here .... in Pakistan, have at it. With or without that nation's permission).

And therein lies the chasm between the conservatives and the Left. We respect the Constitution, whereas you guys twist it to fit your worldview...

Try as you might... You just can't nail down Jell-O

02-15-2012, 06:04 PM

Odysseus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble

Not if that window is in the United States.

You cross a serious line when you enable the military to start assassinating American citizens in their homes (assuming that home is here .... in Pakistan, have at it. With or without that nation's permission).

If they are in the United States, we can capture them. If they are in a foreign country, and that country is either an ally or neutral, then we identify them, and ask the host nation to turn over the persons who are operating against us from their territory and violating their neutrality. And, if the host fails to fulfill its obligations under the Geneva Conventions, then it waives its neutrality and we are free to turn anonymous into a fine red mist.

02-15-2012, 06:06 PM

Arroyo_Doble

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apache

And therein lies the chasm between the conservatives and the Left. We respect the Constitution, whereas you guys twist it to fit your worldview...

Try as you might... You just can't nail down Jell-O

You respect the Constitution by ignoring the at least three amendments (I would argue 4 but don't want to get into the whole thing about whether the 9th is rhetorical or not) and part of Article I Section 9?

02-15-2012, 06:08 PM

Arroyo_Doble

Quote:

Originally Posted by Odysseus

If they are in the United States, we can capture them. If they are in a foreign country, and that country is either an ally or neutral, then we identify them, and ask the host nation to turn over the persons who are operating against us from their territory and violating their neutrality. And, if the host fails to fulfill its obligations under the Geneva Conventions, then it waives its neutrality and we are free to turn anonymous into a fine red mist.

For espionage? Or revenge?

Are you sure this isn't political for you? Would you have turned Lawrence Franklin into red mist?

02-15-2012, 06:16 PM

Apache

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble

You respect the Constitution by ignoring the at least three amendments (I would argue 4 but don't want to get into the whole thing about whether the 9th is rhetorical or not) and part of Article I Section 9?